Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 350 (GUJ)

Babulal Ramanlal Vaidya v. S. A. Chauhan

2002-04-23

B.C.PATEL, D.S.SINHA

body2002
D. S. SINHA, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Mr. V. N. Bhagodia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. ( 2 ) BY means of its judgment and order, date 29th September, 2001, the gujarat Civil Services Tribunal (hereafter to be called "the Tribunal"), set aside the order dated 28th January 1999, dismissing the petitioner from service, and directed his reinstatement with entire consequential benefit within 4 months. ( 3 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, despite being approached therefor repeatedly, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have not complied with the order of the Tribunal, and have thus rendered themselves liable to be punished under the provisions of the contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Hence this application. ( 4 ) IT cannot be gainsaid that ordinarily contempt jurisdiction ought not to be invoked for the purpose of execution and implementation of the order passed by the statutory forum. The procedure prescribed for enforcement of the order passed by a statutory forum provided under the remedial statute has to be adhered to. In the instant case, Section 16a of the gujarat Civil Services Tribunal Act, 1972 (hereafter to be called "the Act") provides that all orders passed by the Tribunal shall be executed in the same manner in which similar orders, if passed by the state Government, could have been executed. Thus, for the purpose of enforcement and execution of the order of the Tribunal dated 29th September, 2001, the remedy of the petitioner lies somewhere else. The petitioner, if so advised, may pursue that remedy by approaching the State Government as provided under Section 16a of the Act. ( 5 ) MR. Bhagodia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, very fairly, informs the Court that for the purpose of implementation of the order of the tribunal dated 29th September, 2001, the petitioner has already initiated execution proceeding before the Tribunal on 20th march, 2002, and the proceeding is pending. ( 6 ) FURTHER, it is brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel of the petitioner that the State of Gujarat, through Principal Chief Conservator of forests, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar, has filed Special Civil Application in this court, challenging the order of the tribunal dated 29th September, 2001, and the application is pending. ( 6 ) FURTHER, it is brought to the notice of the Court by the learned counsel of the petitioner that the State of Gujarat, through Principal Chief Conservator of forests, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar, has filed Special Civil Application in this court, challenging the order of the tribunal dated 29th September, 2001, and the application is pending. ( 7 ) ON the facts and circumstances noticed hereinabove, the Court is of the opinion that there is no occasion for it to intervene in the matter, and that the instant contempt application is utterly misconceived. It is rejected acordingly. .